Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.27 seconds)
Gulchaman vs The State Of U.T. Chandigarh And Another on 28 July, 2023 cites

State Of Haryana vs Subash Chander Marwaha And Ors on 2 May, 1973

"xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xx A perusal of the above judgment would show that reference in the same was made to the Kothari Committee's Report on the "Recruitment Policy and Selection Methods for the Civil Services Examination", in which, it has been pointed out that in respect of interviews where a written test is also to be held, the number of candidates to be called for interview should not exceed twice the number of vacancies to be filled. Reference in the said judgment was made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case titled as 'State of Haryana Vs. Subash Chander Marwahal', reported as (1974) 1 SCR 165, in which, it has been held that there was nothing arbitrary in fixing the score of 55% for the purpose of selection although a candidate obtaining 45% was eligible to be appointed as per the relevant rule.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 762 - D G Palekar - Full Document

Tata Cellular vs Union Of India on 26 July, 1994

A perusal of the above judgment would show that it had been held that the method of short-listing can be validly adopted by the Selection Body even if there is no rule providing for short-listing, more so, when there are a large number of candidates who apply and it is not possible for the authority to interview all of them. Reference in the said judgment was made to a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in case titled as 'Tata Cellular v. Union of India, reported as (1994) 6 SCC 293 on the aspect that the Courts should observe the principle of restraint in interfering with administrative decisions. While deciding the matter, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had highlighted certain examples of short-listing and one such 17 of 24 ::: Downloaded on - 02-08-2023 22:52:30 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:096990 CWP-11620-2023 and -18- (2023:PHHC:096990) CWP-11639-2023 example was where the essential degree required for a candidate to be eligible for being appointed was, MSc degree, but for the purpose of short listing, it was observed that it was open to the authorities to only call those persons who had PhD degree. The ratio of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the abovesaid case supports the pleas raised by the counsel for the respondent, although, in the above said case, the manner in which short listing of candidates was carried out by the authorities was set aside on the ground that the exercise undertaken by the authorities was contrary to the advertisement itself. The law laid down in the above said judgments makes it abundantly clear that it is open to the respondent authorities to short list candidates and to prescribe a test/condition for the said purpose, which is universally applicable to all the candidates when the number of candidates is higher as compared to the posts advertised, as has been done in the present case. No judgment to the contrary has been cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Supreme Court of India Cites 33 - Cited by 3275 - S Mohan - Full Document

Ashok Kumar Yadav And Ors. Etc. Etc vs State Of Haryana And Ors. Etc. Etc on 10 May, 1985

Reference has also been made in the said judgment to a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 'Ashok Kumar Yadav Vs. State of Haryana' reported as (1985) 4 SCC 417, in which, it has been observed that it would be impossible to carry out a satisfactory viva voce test where the number of candidates was very high, whereas, the number of posts were much lower. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, after considering the said judgments, had set aside the judgment of the High Court where the High Court had observed that raising the period from five years to seven and half years' practice for the purpose of calling candidates 15 of 24 ::: Downloaded on - 02-08-2023 22:52:30 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:096990 CWP-11620-2023 and -16- (2023:PHHC:096990) CWP-11639-2023 for interview amounted to changing the statutory criteria by an administrative decision. It was held that the High Court had not appreciated the true implication of short-listing which does not amount to altering or changing the criteria prescribed in the rule, but is only a part of the selection process. In the said judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld the action of the authorities whereby in order to short-list the candidates only those candidates were called for being appointed to the post of Presiding Officers of the Labour Courts, who had seven and half years of practice although as per Section 8(3)(c) of the M.P. Industrial Relations Act, 1960, which was the relevant provision, a person was required to have only five years of experience. The said judgment fully supports the case of the respondents.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 998 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document

Shikhar Shukla & Ors. vs State Of U.P. & Anr. on 25 November, 2019

1. This order will dispose of two writ petitions i.e. CWP-11620- 2023 titled as 'Gulchaman Vs. The State of U.T. Chandigarh and another' and CWP-11639-2023 titled as 'Shikha Shukla and others Vs. The State of 1 of 24 ::: Downloaded on - 02-08-2023 22:52:29 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:096990 CWP-11620-2023 and -2- (2023:PHHC:096990) CWP-11639-2023 U.T. Chandigarh and another', as common questions of law and facts are involved in both the writ petitions.
Allahabad High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 1 - R Singh - Full Document
1